Legal vs. Lawful

What does Legal mean? What does Lawful mean? Is there a difference, if so, so what?

In this article we’ll start to explore the differences between what is Legal, and what is Lawful (in a general sense); and in doing so, see whether we can unearth any remedy and relief; which may aid our day to day life in these pirate infestered waters.

What is Law? With so many different ‘bodies’ of ‘Law’ it can get overwhelming, fast. In no particular order, and by no means an exhaustive list, we have: Canon Law, International Law, Civil Law, Criminal Law, New Zealand Law, Positive Law, Common Law, Admiralty, Statute, Corporate, Commercial, as well as Bylaws, etc, etc…

Argh, it goes on and on, and to make things even more perplexing, over the course of history, collections of ‘Law’ seem to have competed, crossed-over, and fused together to varying degrees.

And, let’s not forget, Natural Law, the Laws of Physics, and ‘God’s Law’. Hmm, is it possible we’ve uncovered our first clue: there’s a key distinction to keep in mind here as we move forward: the former examples of ‘Law’ are all man-made, while the latter Laws, aren’t man-made; they just are – indisputably so.

Then what about ‘Legal’? Is ‘legal’ the same as ‘lawful’? Are these words synonymous? If something is said to be legal, is it ‘the Law’ or ‘Lawful’. I’d not asked myself these sorts of questions, prior to a few years ago. If i, had been called upon to supply an immediate answer, prior to October 2021, when much of ‘reality’ started to contort and shatter for me, i, would have said something like, ‘Umm, are legal and lawful the same, sure, yeah i guess so’.

These days i, would resoundingly state, ‘Nah bro, no way, completely different, man’. Armed with this small seed alone will sprout much remedy, my friends, as will be expanded upon, rolled out, here, as we go, as well as through the imminent YouTube Channel, ‘The Good Merchant 1908’.

Call me a conspiracy theorist, however as i, with more and more clarity see where mankind’s remedies lie, i, would almost say the waters between Legal and Lawful have, over time, been muddied with deliberate intent to confuse.

When one attempts to pull from the internet definitive conclusion on the matter, one stumbles off more disorientated than when they began. Rephrasely says, “Lawful is an adjective that means conforming to the law or in agreement with the law. Legal is an adjective that means permitted by law or following the law”, and goes on to state: “Lawful refers to something that is in accordance with the law, while legal refers to something that has been established by law. Therefore, although something may be lawful, it may not always be legal, and vice versa.” [bold, emphasis mine]

Eh, what?

And from the ‘What is Not Legal’ * website we see: “The definition of legal would be everything related to law whereas lawful describes the substance of the law. That is the major difference between legal vs. lawful. There is the possibility of something being illegal in its form however its substance can be lawful.” The same article also says, “Legal simply means something that is allowed by law. It doesn’t involve the complexity of implementation of ethics and morals”. [bold, emphasis mine]

Haha, no we shouldn’t allow ethics and morals to get in the way of some good ol’ ‘legal’ commercial piracy should we!? 

All this, ‘permitted by’, ‘allowed by’, ‘following’, ‘related to’, ‘established by’; all this ‘looks-like’ language; suggests to me they aren’t the same and that there may be important differences to pursue, decipher, possibly. It also leads me to think ‘legal’ is definitely subservient to its master, LAW. Is it conceivable then that one may find knowledge, power, and remedy, knocking about in the higher jurisdictions? Foregoing ‘their’ legal ‘benefits’ for a life grounded in Law.

* Incidentally, the aforementioned website [What is Not Legal] seems to have been wiped off the face of the internet since i, last perused it. In instances like these we use the ‘Wayback Machine’; to travel back in time to the internet’s past. Which is also very handy for when Government agencies, drug companies, and mainstream media try to cover their tracks by removing what they previously stated as ‘fact’!

The above use of words ‘substance’ and ‘form’, is also interesting, telling perhaps. These two words have popped up again and again throughout my ongoing ‘archaeological dig’ of history, law, and money.

For example: Gold and Silver are real: tangible; they have perceivable ‘substance’ and weight (value). While ‘fiat-currency-paper-promissory-pretend-debt-monopoly-money’ (or ‘cash’ for short) is merely two dimensional (2D); it has ‘form’ only, no real ‘value’; it casts no shadow; it is the cheap imitation, ripoff, to ‘substance’. Law has substance; Legal has form only.

So is ‘legal’ the trickster, the pretender, the impersonator, the framework for those that control Governments to cunningly take, inch by inch, decade after decade, more and more, of one’s lawful standing and natural rights. From the naive and gullible. To then ‘kindly’ return to us ‘things’ in the form of ‘duties’, ‘benefits’, ‘privileges’, and ‘obligations’. Rights have slowly but steadily been cunningly withdrawn over generations from those that have forgotten; taken from the lazy and complacent. ‘They’ extract the value (substance) and replace it with lookalike cardboard cutouts (form).

Those that do not know their rights, have none!…

“ The laws serve the vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. ” [Maxim of Law]
“ Relief is not given to such as sleep on their rights. ” [Maxim of Law]
“ Time runs against the slothful and those who neglect their rights. ” [Proverbs 24:30-31]

“ If one fails to understand the fundamental principles of law, then there is no end to which he can be misled or deceived about what is right and what is wrong! Such a person could easily become subject to government encroachments, or be manoeuvred into surrendering his/her rights. ” [Maxims of Law – Book]

Let’s now open our trusty Black’s Law Dictionaries (the 4th Ed. on this occasion). Surely from Black’s we will extract definitive evidence that Legal and Lawful are not the same thing…

Oh great, the very first word used to describe LAWFUL is, you guessed it: Legal! Hmm. Pressing on, however, we again see hints of an established pecking order between the two distant cousins; a duality; legal: a contorted mirror image of, and attempting to mimic, LAW; constructed to fool and misdirect, the ignorant and weary. Sorry, i, may have slipped my own definition in there.

OK, back to Black’s: Lawful (…) contemplates the substance of law. [Legal] …the form of law”. [bold, emphasis mine]. Looks like but isn’t eh!? Imposter! i, knew it. Sounds like a magic show to me, rife with smoke and mirrors, tricks and trapdoors. Quick, snap out from under ‘their’ hypnotic grasp, with yet another potent Maxim of Law: Legality is not Reality. Yikes, that says it all right there doesn’t it?!

And during the referencing of that particular Maxim, i, exhumed these long unremembered gems too; providing further distinction between Legal and Lawful…

“ We are all bound to our lawgiver [Jesus / God], regardless of our personal interpretation of reality. ” [Isaiah 33:22 / James 4:12]

“ When Jesus spoke the Truth to his accusers, he would justify himself by quoting Law. First, he would quote God's Law, and after quoting God's Law He would often quote the accuser's law and use that against them as well. For example, Jesus would say, "Did ye never read in the scriptures..." and then quote God's Law. Then He would turn around and say, "Is it not written in your law..." and quote their own law! His accusers would have no answer, they could not overcome Him. How could anyone overcome somebody who is obeying both God's Law and man's law!? If a man made law is just, it will be in harmony with God's Law. …

…This is the purpose of this article [Maxims of Law]. These maxims are the foundation and principles of the laws that man passes today. Unfortunately, men enforce their own will more than they enforce law. So, this is why, in addition to knowing God's Law, it is also important to know man's law, because man's law is based upon God's Law. And when you are accused of "breaking the law," you can do what Jesus did, and use both God's Law and man's law to justify your lawful acts, for this is the only thing that will excuse you. ” 

[bold, emphasis mine]
https://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/LegalRef/MaximsOfLaw.htm

Looking at the Black’s Law definition of Legal; again we see support for the lesser of the two, being ‘legal’; with phrases like: ‘according to’, ‘permitted by’, ‘recognised by’, and ‘pertaining to’. And even more signposts suggesting remedy exists in higher realms (Law), when compared to the B-grade runner-up (legal system), with statements such as: [Legal]…’as distinguished from courts of equity’ and ‘in contradistinction to the rules of equity’.

We’ll dive into what ‘Equity’ is in future articles, however in a nutshell, Equity is the spirit of fairness, justness, and right dealings between those of mankind. As we have just seen, from its very definition, ‘legal’ is none of those things [fair, just, or right]. i, also chuckle as i read [Legal] ‘…a matter of construction, rather than established by actual proof’. [bold, emphasis mine].

Law can be seen as reality; being true; dealing with something factual that can be proven by way of evidence. While Legal can be seen as fiction; man-made; opposing sides both ‘arguing’ their own version of ‘truth’; opinions of what is considered ‘true’. In the legal-world, unrebutted ‘facts’ can lack proof but still be considered the truth by the courts. Stand back and ask whether something is morally right. Something can be ‘legally’ correct according to their rules, codes, and statutes, however it may not be lawful and morally right.

From the New Zealand Law Dictionary (NZLD), 10th Edition, we see Lawful as: ‘Allowable; able to be done without infraction of the law; supported by the law; the quality of being legally enforceable.’ Dam it, we almost got away with defining one without using the other.

In the same dictionary, Legal is defined as: ‘Related to law or legal issues; lawful; enforceable. …(“the legal substance of the relevant arrangement”). [LAWFUL].
[bold, emphasis mine].

Ok, now they’re deliberately trying to mess with me by mixing all the key words together in the same sentence; claiming legal is lawful, and legal has substance. Someone please have a word with Peter Spiller.

Back in Black’s, the word ‘colorable’ adds,…well, colour to the subject at hand by suggesting those ‘in power’ may be capable of acting in ways they oughtn’t. Color of Law: The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Color: An appearance, semblance, (…) as distinguished from that which is real. (…) a deceptive appearance; a plausible, assumed exterior, concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext.

Is ‘legal’, Color of Law; the sneaky theft of our lawful rights all for dollar dollar bills y’all? Also of note, Legal fiction: An assumption that purports to or does conceal, alter or modify a fact or rule of law. (NZLD).

Legal and Lawful are thrown around in everyday life as if they are interchangeable; the same. i, say there is benefit in knowing these are different worlds. That similar, is NOT the same. Knowing this, alone, has been enormously helpful in growing deeper comprehension. My dealings, now, with the ‘acting’ ‘powers that be’, are conducted along the lines of keeping these two worlds/strategies [LEGAL vs. LAWFUL] clearly separated, as much as practical.

Nurture your own depth of innerstanding by investing in self-study and knowledge over time. You will be rewarded with inner-knowing, strength, clarity, remedy, and practical application; which will unfold within and before you. Seeing Law, as God’s Law, a set of principles for mankind (not persons) to follow, is one of the keys to unlocking your freedom.

For some, it may lend credibility, of sorts, to know that what i, say doesn’t come from a blind faith. These suggestions come from someone (me) that plucked up the courage, at an early age, to say, ‘Hey Mum, I don’t think this Sunday School carry-on is for me’…‘it all feels a bit far-fetched and silly to me’. Followed thereafter by a life of quietly thinking to myself that science ruled, and that the concept of some bearded dude in the clouds, with ultimate say over man, was a ridiculous abstraction.

It has been through the self-study of Law, History and Money, which has been foundational, paramount, in the unravelling of ‘their’ innumerable narratives which sway and subconsciously direct our day to day perceptions of what is. It has been through these endeavours that my mind has opened somewhat to the notion there may be higher forces at play here.

And through the observation and reflection of my own life (as evidence), i, say there is definitely a connectedness, spiritual force, focus-and-attract-to-one’s-self-that-which-one-desires, kind of energy available, within this reality. If of course one questions, taps into, and learns to recognise the sometimes very subtle flow and cues.

Let’s (if willing) reserve LAW as those rules given to man by forces above man. Whether it be God’s Law, Natural Law, or some sort of Universal Law. And know that ‘legal’ is man’s plethora of weird, often not so wonderful, codes, rules, acts, and statutes.

LAW is the stuff, we, mankind, didn’t create; the laws that just are; reality; the innate morality wired into the larger percentile of us. Legal is the few over-complicating and contorting what is lawful into ever-expanding rules and restrictions, to laden their pockets with our time, energy, freedoms, and private wealth.

Start to see the simple and natural order of things: 

God’s Law (or Universal Laws) dictates to mankind >
Mankind dictates to that which he/she creates >
Corporations

How is it that the things WE created (Government, Inland Revenue, Police, Councils, Corporations…) seem to be dictating to us, more and more so. i, can’t see us dictating new terms to God. How are these lower man-made jurisdictions dictating to us? Plain and simple, my friends: complacency, ignorance, fear, and the forgetting of who/what we are (we are those of mankind). We’ve forgotten that the power and dominion is vested in each and every one of us; not with our creations gone mad.

We’ve somewhere through the generations misplaced the knowledge that we were each born with god-given, natural rights, and that ‘their’ rules, codes, and statutes don’t apply to man and woman without our consent. The rules apply to the titles you take on; the contracts you sign. Those titles aren’t you, they are hats you can wear if/when you desire. Consent and agreement to the rules of corporations is voluntary, not mandatory. Accepting their ‘commercial offers’ is discretionary. Remember, we created these entities; we can decide what and when, we comply and interact with, or not. 

Do i, the writer, have say over you, the reader? No? Then why would one assume you have any say over i? Or that they (corporations), have say over us (mankind).

God > Mankind > Corporations ; not the other way around

Stay tuned – Next we’ll expand on the essence of Legal vs. Lawful by discovering and unpacking the differences between ‘Persons’ and those of Mankind.